Just a thought so I can get called a troll again ,but would a top5 or Top6 format in next seasons SL Finals series help England in the World Cup by giving players more meaningful and high pressure games during the regular season and a more intense playoffs format and help simulate the intensity Origin provides the Kangaroos?

yes....less games the better next year....send them to south africa for 3 weeks next year.

I wasn't thinking for less games but more intense and meaningful games ,the end of the this season there was to many meaningless games and the playoffs lacked the intensity that seems to be in the NRL which battle hardens the Kangaroos and Kiwis!

This makes sense. If we were a joined up sport capable of collective action, then we could limit the number of games played by England squad players. Nothing else matters next year apart from the World Cup.

This makes sense. If we were a joined up sport capable of collective action, then we could limit the number of games played by England squad players. Nothing else matters next year apart from the World Cup.

Fully agree. Personally I would limit the players in the England Elite Squad to a maximum of say 18/20 SL games next year. This would not only keep them fresher but would also give fringe/Academy players more of a go as well. Additional training camps could be set up on pre-determined weekends throughout the season as well to try and replicate a club environment, rather than us turning up as the burnt out, uncohesive unit we usually are.

Obviously this would never happen in a sport where club chairmen dictate policy and put their club before the overall game. However, England RU did something similar in 2003 and as a result managed to win a World Cup with an average team but a good goal kicker!

"Rugby League is rugby in the simplest form in the sense that it's about great defence, great tackling technique, good handling, good passing, catching and great kicking."

Fully agree. Personally I would limit the players in the England Elite Squad to a maximum of say 18/20 SL games next year. This would not only keep them fresher but would also give fringe/Academy players more of a go as well. Additional training camps could be set up on pre-determined weekends throughout the season as well to try and replicate a club environment, rather than us turning up as the burnt out, uncohesive unit we usually are.

Obviously this would never happen in a sport where club chairmen dictate policy and put their club before the overall game. However, England RU did something similar in 2003 and as a result managed to win a World Cup with an average team but a good goal kicker!

Nice idea in theory but downsides:

Saving England players by not allowing them to play more than X matches. The average club coach/chairman would say to the RFL, 'you want to decide what games they play in, you pay them'.It would lead to clubs going out of their way to not signing established England internationals possibly even looking at favoring more foreign signings over England qualifying players.Clubs less willing to offer long term deals to younger players in case he is swallowed but by a future games limit if an international. Less incentive to bring that same young player through in case they do turn out to be an international.Basically it would put barriers in the way of development because we see internationals as secondary to our club game, which it is because of lack of real international competition.